Hello ladies and gentlemen,


Today, I decided to translate a text I just wrote yesterday. I inform you that text is composed of two parts, and the first one is a response to an ancient text I will not translate, because of its age. So, I give you the second part in English, and if I have some time, I shall think about integrate the first part in this translation. Waiting that, here is the full text in French. I tried to be the most faithful to the ideas. I think those ideas are enough abstract to pass on the limits of the translation between French and English. Enjoy!

I think it is abusive to present yourself to the community as an architect. This thesis is supported by three fundamental arguments: the architectural projects and the usefulness of the buildings, and the architectural context.

I precise the definition that follows is neither absolute nor universal. Nevertheless, it seems to me that definition worth its equivalent in sweets needed to keep the children busy when being in front of a screen.


Architecture: field of study whose object is the reflection and the conception of catered spaces.


The longer time goes on, the more I am convinced that what describe, among other things, this field of study are the projects. The projects require method, analyzing, propensity to propose solutions to given issues, are really something different than the most of the creation called architecture in Minecraft. Someone told me previously that was normal because Minecraft is a game, inhabited, there cannot exist an intrinsic architecture in it. A host of IG behaviors are very similar, perhaps the same, than in the reality.
Feed; sleep; have your own roof; meet to share, to confront; create; produce; harvest sundry resources are significant behaviors in both Minecraft and reality.
So, all these behaviors may get an IG architectural response. Proper to Minecraft, admittedly, but this is not the question. The question is to know if it is possible to create catered spaces. And it clearly occurs.


But the project are also documentation, analyzes, critics, dialogues, suggestions. I do not see that in Minecraft buildings enough. Eh! Do not put words in my mouth. Real Minecraft projects exist, and architectural ones. I always blind myself in front of those ones, and as well as I was lucky enough to get part in few ones, I can assure you the difference is clear.
Far be it from me to criticize or demean working methods that would not be mine, but just seeing the way the overwhelming majority of players build – meaning going straight IG, placing blocks, judging, changing some lines here and there, moving a wall over there – we can understand there is no sufficient thinking behind.

Another point, coming directly from the vision of what the Minecraft buildings are: the environment. The most of Minecraft creations has only an esthetic value. And that is what I criticize. And that makes the difference with the architecture in reality. How to rectify it? If more players introducing themselves as architects would think more of the environment in which the creation shall be part of, a major advance would be made. An observer reminds the building as well as its context.


[img]blob:https://www.planetminecraft.com/e9d6ce1b-0b0a-4fc1-9ea4-093c44696f5b[/img]


4x4 house, by Tadao Ando.

[img]blob:https://www.planetminecraft.com/d49b79bb-baf9-450c-a5e6-c953755fd6ed[/img]


4x4 house, my reproduction.


This is a perfect example because the original building is set up in a very specific context. Seaside house, near to a great pain place, urbanization behind it. And nothing of that is in my map. A floating house, there it is. It would please the surrealistic ones, perhaps…




That ends my text. Feel free to comment.